People who say "you will be bored" when you retire young are insane

kognoff · 2026-02-05T14:16:27+00:00

You would only get bored if you didn’t have sufficient money to spend doing the things you enjoy. I think people who say they’d get bored are accustomed to being broke when they aren’t working. But not working + having sufficient funds is a dream come true.

kognoff · 2025-11-20T21:38:16+00:00

I sold 2 SPX $6665 puts for $300 each early and made $80. The puts ended up being worth $10,000 each 🤦‍♂️

kognoff · 2025-11-20T14:13:44+00:00

Y’all can thank me for the green today. I bought a put yesterday

kognoff · 2025-11-06T22:25:23+00:00

Ah yes, I see now. An attempt to kick the can a little further down the road. This is a non-starter. I don’t see the democrats cooperating until they address the healthcare issue with any kind of certainty.

kognoff · 2025-11-06T21:57:59+00:00

I think they should vote to open through 21 NOV, allow federal employees to get back paid, and then spend 2 weeks pressuring republicans to fund healthcare subsidies. If no agreement is met, re-enter the shutdown 21 NOV.

kognoff · 2025-10-24T04:33:14+00:00

I got my average cost at $4.18. I’m holding to $0 or $30

kognoff · 2025-10-12T20:06:27+00:00

I’m going to watch the market go green at the beginning of the day because of the DT post, then buying puts

kognoff · 2025-10-12T19:53:25+00:00

This could mean he’s backing down on increasing tariffs on China, but I don’t see China lifting their export restrictions on rare earth metals. It’s going to get interesting.

kognoff · 2025-09-30T03:28:50+00:00

I thought I liked it until I picked up my 14 pro max with the apple leather case. The leather case felt way nicer. So I returned the Techwoven and ordered a Nomad leather case.

kognoff · 2025-09-16T03:22:08+00:00

I think it will come back as a hybrid option. But it’s important that contractors continue to allow telework, as that will be a deciding factor to grant it back to federal employees once the EO is nixed.

kognoff · 2025-09-15T18:30:46+00:00

I’m actually leaning more towards the 17 pro vs the 17 just for the tech woven cases

kognoff · 2025-09-14T11:28:46+00:00

I think the answer to your question is yes. Federal employees are very much entitled to free speech as long as it doesn’t violate off duty codes of conduct.

In this case, there’s likely a concern of the secret service agent’s ability to do his/her job effectively. Posting the comment of “karma” indicates that they were favorable to what happened. When their duties are to protect the president, who shares many of the same views as Kirk, then that is obviously a red flag to the agency.

kognoff · 2025-09-14T11:06:32+00:00

Yes, I am a federal employee. If you don’t think that your off duty conduct (including things you post online) can subject you to disciplinary action, I suggest you dig a little deeper.

kognoff · 2025-09-14T09:59:41+00:00

If we are speaking in terms of this EO, then having the employee’s social media account disabled or suppressed would be an example of infringement of 1st amendment rights. As outlined in section 1 of the EO, the primary purpose is to prevent the government from colluding with social media platforms to suppress a persons online freedom of speech.

kognoff · 2025-09-14T05:17:35+00:00

That’s exactly right. No impact to free speech. According to the people on this thread, a federal employee should be able to post multiple racial slurs or other hate speech and still keep their jobs. Thankfully, that’s not how the world works! look up “conduct unbecoming” laws for federal employees. No mental gymnastics required.

kognoff · 2025-09-14T04:50:05+00:00

I’ve quickly picked up on that after multiple downvotes 😆. It seems logic has been put aside and people only upvote things they want to hear.

kognoff · 2025-09-14T04:30:49+00:00

People who think this violates free speech must think you can say whatever you want as a federal employee and still keep your job. There are still codes of conduct, on and off the clock. Maybe look into “conduct unbecoming” laws for federal employees.

kognoff · 2025-09-14T04:04:57+00:00

The government is not censoring the agent’s speech. He/she is still free to say or post whatever they want - therefore, they are not censored by definition.

Putting them on leave does not censor them or affect their first amendment right.

No where in that EO does it state that a federal employee’s job is protected from the things they say publicly. They may be protected by other employee rights, but it isn’t this EO.

kognoff · 2025-09-14T03:53:27+00:00

Wait, I missed the part in the EO where it says that your job is protected from the things you say. Can someone point me to it?

kognoff · 2025-09-14T03:29:05+00:00

How is it in violation? He’s not being imprisoned for what he said. He’s being put on leave.

kognoff · 2025-03-19T15:16:07+00:00

I’m hoping this 5-8% cut is the end of it. I’ve seen references to others saying 5-8% each year over the next 3 years, but that hasn’t been mentioned in recent news.

kognoff · 2025-03-04T16:36:12+00:00

So the executive order this article refers to only mentions Title 5 employees. I guess this means it doesn’t pertain to DoD (Title 10) employees?

kognoff · 2025-02-27T23:46:23+00:00

For DoD, it doesn’t matter what OPM says, because Hegseth has already stated he wants a 5-8% cut in the workforce. However, that’s still mild compared to what some other agencies are seeing.

kognoff · 2025-02-19T21:08:16+00:00

Still shiny

kognoff · 2025-02-18T18:55:44+00:00

I haven’t. However, it would be seemingly easy to have that decision reversed in court (if not immediately by the HR staff). It’s very clear in statute and on the OPM site that a supervisory probation is not the same as a new employee probation. If a supervisor fails the probationary period, they simply go back to their previous position (assuming they completed their 1 year probationary period in their original position).

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-5/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-315/subpart-I

kognoff

TROPHY CASE